A Rush Limbaugh For the Next Generation

Christianity is a choice, bigotry is a choice. Sexuality is not.

I wonder if he understands the irony of saying homosexuals are being indoctrinated?

God or no God, this child isn’t going to teach anybody ANYTHING.

I disagree. When I look back at my young self I very clearly recall having crushes on other little girls and getting a time out and a lecture for asking my kindergarten teacher if I could marry her when I grew up. True, little children are not sexual in the sense that teenagers are, but orientation exists to some degree.

As an aside, do you think everyone would seem this inarticulate in transcript?  Lately I’ve been noticing how terrible conservatives seem to be at forming sentences.

It’s sad when kids are raised by parents and a community that don’t have a full set of teeth between them, let alone fifth-grade reading ability.  It’s regrettable that this kid somehow got the idea that he had something worthwhile to say, when really, he’s just parroting the ignorant, half-baked ideas and bigoted screed of his elders.  It’s appalling to hear this kid’s homophobia – his fixation on it smacks of fears about his own sexuality – and it’s downright scary to think what this kid might do if he chose to wield a gun instead of a microphone.   
On second thought, one can damage a lot more people at any one time with hate talk than with bullets, and not even get arrested for it.  

“It’s equal, boy and girl both.  All of them are starting to turn into homosexuals.   ”

I can easily believe he’s seeing more kids who are gay. Is it because they’re being “encouraged” or somehow turned gay by evil and wicked liberals? No… it’s because they’re not as afraid to come out as they used to be.  Kids are being encouraged by decent adults to think that their sexuality (whatever it may be) is normal, and that they don’t have to hide it away for all eternity. The natural result is that there will be more (openly) gay people. But twerps like this look around and think, “OHMIGOD EVERYONE’S TURNING GAY!!!”

“You are saying that it is alright to follow this belief, it is completely natural, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s not immoral.”

Aside from the “belief” part of this, he’s right here. This is indeed what decent people are saying. Personally, I think it’s a good thing that gay kids are no longer being told they’re sinners at every turn.

“We prayed that God would show you the light and you would turn away from your evil and wicked beliefs of homosexuality.”

Sure, that’s not bullying in the least. How silly of anyone to take that the wrong way. Clearly it’s meant in a spirit of kindness and love *rolls eyes*. 

 I think this kid’s sickening attitude was perfectly transcribed, i’ve seen the video, he tries to act like what he’s saying is cool and that the absolute truth comes out of his mouth. He’s  second on my “Punch in the face until you can’t feel your hands” list (the first is bieber ofc :p )

If sexual preference is a decision then by that logic heterosexuality is just a conclusion; a byproduct of Caiden Cowger lusting men and women equally then ‘choosing’ women, likely only because gawd says so.

“It’s a good thing Caiden has his god to teach him that we need to love
each another, or this kid might turn out to be an asshole one day.”

Too late, he already IS an asshole.

I disagree on the “fair game” comment.  This garbage is something he’s been taught, and it’s something that he is almost certainly praised for doing.  I don’t begrudge him for wanting to be accepted by his community or “good” at something.  Honestly, I think that’s one of the most appealing aspect of church/religious education for some children– it is an area of life where it’s very easy to “succeed.” It can take a long time to realize that this approval isn’t everything.

Wait until he’s 18.  If he’s still spewing hate when he’s an adult, then go after him all you want. 

Oh the irony of someone being sickened by bigotry and then (even jokingly) proudly proclaiming they have a list of people they want to beat until they can’t feel their hands. Also, Bieber is annoying, but what has he ever done to you for you to want to assault him even more than this bigot?

It’s perfectly okay for them to talk about how they think it’s wrong, but anyone who disagrees is harming children. 

And then they whine when someone gives them the reaction their hypocrisy deserves. 

Sexuality isn’t a choice. Being as dense as these Christians are is. 

I just wanna say I actually read “By God” as “bigot”. That would make for a cool typography image, you know, if someone who wasn’t a lazy fuck like me wanted to make it. No need to apologize, there’s crazies all around the world.

I ALMOST agree with you, but it’s hard to think about the damage he’ll do in the 4 intervening years…

 As an educated person with missing teeth…

 “gender queer”

I have never heard the term so I googled it. According to the Urban Dictionary it is defined as:

“most commonly used to describe a person who feels that
his/her gender identity does not fit into the socially constructed
“norms” associated with his/her biological sex.
”

Not sure it fits. I was leaning towards having no set preference, a form of asexuality so to speak,  hence one would have to make a conscience choice between two equally weighted options.

I really feel that he is telling himself that his childhood friends couldn’t have been gay because he is terrified that he might have ‘caught’ it.

Sounds like someone who hasn’t come to terms with his own sexuality yet. Otherwise he wouldn’t feel threatened like that.

Assuming this isn’t sarcasm, I wonder if you pondered the literal meaning of “motherfucker” and West Virginia’s reputation for incest before using the word? And yes, I’m a West Virginia native, too.

As I’m not a part of the usual echo chamber here at this website, I can actually agree with most of this:

Ah yes, what follows are explanations as to why it’s bullying to tell
someone who is gay that it is wrong, but telling people their religion
is wrong isn’t bullying.  Despite the fact that religion, like anything,
is a result of people making things up in order to cope with life while
they pass on their DNA.  Or my favorite, that it’s wrong to tell people
to convert to Christianity, but it’s wonderful to tell people to leave
their faith (as in Catholics, leave your church).

However, you too engage in prejudice when you say:

They have no moral foundation.  They believe in whatever gets them what
they want or helps them win an argument today.  They aren’t based on
anything other than ‘I want it now’.

On one side, we have atheists stereotyping Christians as intellectually stunted immoral bigots and on the other hand, we have Christians stereotyping atheists as amoral hedonists who would hurt anyone if it accomplished their personal goals.  Both perspectives reduce real life people to hollow caricatures.  Both dehumanize the other group as worthless people, deserving of abuse.

If you fight abuse with abuse, you will only reproduce violence.  It will shift and change form, but the violence one pours into the world inevitably resurfaces.

Sure, literal translations can make you sound dumb but when you actually have poor grammar…well, you do well enough on your own. “The county that I’m at . . .” I assume he means the county school, but as that stands, that sentence is unacceptable. Also note that he as trouble with is/are and was/were. “I see younger people that IS turning out to be homosexual.” I could be out of touch with the communication level a 14 year old should have. I just know that I work with adults that have similar problems (and don’t care). Literal translations can make you sound like a less refined speaker but dumb is dumb.

Real compassion is oriented toward the feelings and the well-being of the person in front of you, not your own sense of self-importance and your psychological need to demonstrate how much more True your Beliefs are than everyone else’s.   This is the big problem with Christianity, all the witnessing and proselytizing.   It’s fundamentally disrespectful to outsiders and other ways of being.   They are taught that they CANNOT live and let live.

Yes, maybe “no set preference” is better. 

I said i want to, not i’m going to, big difference.

There is an update to this story on Huff Post – the Internet hosting site “Spreaker” pulled his show. They said it was hate speech and went against the contract he agreed to when he signed up for the Internet radio hosting services.

Most atheists are good people, typically not reflected by what you see on most atheist blogs (though not all, I’ve been pointed to some pretty interesting blogs where the conversation is more or less rational and respectful).  Nonetheless, too many modern – or shall we say post-modern – atheists seem to revel in the moral relativity of the modern politically driven debate.  Hence you have atheists being shocked – Shocked! – that Christians would tell people that other religions are wrong, while at the same exact moment praising atheists who make a career out of telling Christians (and other religious individuals) that their religious beliefs are wrong, stupid, evil, whatever.  And they do it without missing a beat.  Of course it’s not as if Christians or other religious folks can’t do the same thing – it’s OK when I do it, just not them. It’s especially common in fundamentalist camps within various religious traditions. But that’s why Mark Shea is fond of saying: ‘scratch a modern atheist, and you get a fundamentalist every time.’ 

But I agree with your statement about fighting abuse with abuse.  If the terms I used were too sweeping, I take them back and apologize.

 Of course it’s terrible when xtians proselytise, because it often goes on par with terms such as “hell”, “damnation” or “your mother should have aborted you” (when not direct death threats) as well as the general air of superiority that THEIR beliefs are the only true ones without anything to support that claim. And i’m not mentionning the sense of shame they try to instill in you for being who you are.

when this kid grows up, and ventures into the real world and starts to think for himself…he’s is gonna be so embarrassed. lets hope. just a young parrot at this point.

The one thing I’ve learned in my almost 50 years of life – nobody has a singular claim on the ‘we’re right, you’re stupid/evil, and it’s high time you realize my way is the only way or else…’  approach to life.  Of course some of the things you mention would be horrible to say, and I don’t doubt there are some who have said such things.  Just like there are atheists who doe no better.  At the end of the day, that doesn’t add one thing or another to the core of the debate: which is true. 

Oh, and Christians can also fall into the trap so many atheists fall into: That’s what those types of people do; we never, ever do such things.  Trust me, atheists are no less prone to doing bad, despite what so many atheists nowadays seem to think.

Given enough power, atheists (like all groups of human beings) are perfectly capable of reaching a place where they will abuse their power.  Believing that you are immune from such tendencies might very well make such matters a likely outcome if/as atheists gain majority status.  You are just as human as Christians are and subject to humanity’s propensity for us vs. them thinking and the abuse that usually follows. Ironically, your belief in your own superiority illustrates the tribalistic tendencies I speak of.  Let your collective guard down long enough, and atheists will also make a call to arms against their enemies.

So you claim that god exists and then you demand me to prove that he does not? This common tactic does not work, the burden of proof is still on you and you haven’t provided a single particle of evidence.

The de facto reality is that atheism is currently a social movement with a growing body of common beliefs and behaviors.  It is an ideology with a following whose numbers are increasing with time. 

Religions are also ideologies.

As are economic systems.

As are political philosophies.

All are subject to the usual social forces that bring bad and good into the world.

Ah, but for DG, the burden of proof is upon you. So, you can both stare at the impenetrable walls of each other’s respective ideologies and feel satisfied that all is well and good.

Right now, the cracks I see spreading across the edifice of atheism is a willingness to engage in ridicule and contempt toward others of differing belief systems.  Numerous leaders in the atheist movement have endorsed this method of interaction. The social spaces of atheists are filled with such behaviors.  Any way you look at it, this is the embrace of abuse as a means of achieving your goals and the practice is widespread.

What will be the next step?  Will the embrace of one abusive behavior open a propensity to engage in other forms of abuse as your collective level of social power increases?  Do you think the verbal  abuse and dehumanization of those with differing  beliefs bodes well for the future?

We shall see…

But it’s all perfectly acceptable because religious people use verbal abuse, too.  I wonder how early Christians behaved when they were a young social movement? 

What’s good for the goose…

Then there’s no correlation between atheism and anything good that atheists do.  You can’t have it both ways.  Personally, I think atheists are quite capable of using and exploiting their atheism for personal gain at others’ expenses, just as a lack of belief in God has propelled individuals to delve into some pretty impressive depths.  Same with religion.  Has led people to some pretty bad things, but has also inspired some of the best.  Again, the parlor game that says my side is better than yours is a dead end.  Good for rallying the troops (and sometimes worse), but not really a solution to the age old problem. 

timberwraith has you on that one.  If atheism isn’t a movement, then it needs to stop doing everything under the sun that movements do.  it’s a movement, and in its day, has born some pretty bad examples of human inhumanity.

Atheism is the absence of belief in a god or gods, that’s the common ground for every atheist, whatever political/ideological preference is an individual matter (you can be an atheist and dislike gays or be a racist). The nice thing about it, it’s that it does not occupy the heads or minds of people (i don’t get up in the morning wondering what atheist stuff i should do today or how can i believe less in skydaddy). So if something happens in position of power it will not be due to “absence of belief in a god or gods” but rather personnal interests of individuals. I can’t say the same about religion, because it can justify about everything…

Oh and the US government is already invading muslim countries in the name of national security, remember what happened in Iraq?

And you’re thinking about who? Stalin and whatnot? Sorry but that “argument” was shot down on many occasions.

DG, I think your words have made it clear that you don’t see all atheists as morally stunted people.  That’s good.

My main request is that you please keep in mind that wording such as this can be pretty triggering:

The toughtest thing about post-moderns, I tell my boys, is that they are
amoral.  Especially the secular brand.  They have no moral foundation. 
They believe in whatever gets them what they want or helps them win an
argument today.  They aren’t based on anything other than ‘I want it
now’.   And that’s tough to reason with

Atheists are accused quite regularly of being morally and ethically adrift.  It’s a prejudice that atheists often face.  Plus, such approaches fall into the “my group is better than yours” trap.

Also, a small point: most  atheists I’ve encountered on line tend to frown upon post modernism.

” In another era, with atheists at the helm of a powerful nation and a
powerful military, do you really believe your collective hands will be
free of blood?

History says otherwise.”

Which history? Are you referring to Stalin again? This thing is getting ridiculous, there’s absolutely no proof that he commited crimes in the name of atheism. You know what? Hitler was a vegeterian, what will happen when a vegeterian gets in the position of power? How about someone with a moustache?

“And… I knew these kids.  Some of them I was friends with.”

That says the most about this kid. I am sure that those “ex-friends” are so sad to hear that this bigot doesn’t want to be friends with them anymore.

And yet so many seem to utilize some of its more, shall we say, shady aspects. 

Nonetheless, point taken.  But it is true that too many atheists today, resting on such weak arguments as ‘our side never does anything wrong’, find themselves basically saying ‘that was yesterday’s morality, today it doesn’t count since it helps us to think otherwise.’  That’s hard to square with a consistent moral stance.
I wouldn’t say immoral, since too many atheists are capable of being good.  Problem I see, is that atheism is far more capable of falling into the ‘here today, gone later today’ moralizing of post-modern debate than those confined to an ethic centered on a longer standing tradition.  Not that religious (Christians or otherwise) can’t join in with the best of them.  But simple observation suggests it’s easier for the atheist to join the relativity club when it comes to rules for living. 

So you have problems with that strain of modern atheism that is going around trying to encourage people to quit their religions? 

Well, at least you’re consistent on that one.  That’s fair enough. 

Oh, it compels them to search for meaning in other areas that the religious individual might not be as inclined to consider.  By default, a person who will not believe in God or the divine will be blocked from seeing the universe a certain way.  But the same goes the other direction.  While both are, of course, capable of understanding a variety of perspectives, sometimes that other side of the tracks opens up an insight or perspective that those who have other world views might miss. 

Oy, we are running out of space to type readable sentences.

DG, religion shifts its take on morality as well.  Not so long ago, slavery, segregation, the oppression of non-protestant Christians, the oppression of Jews, and so on, were justified as proper moral behavior by what was once considered mainstream Christianity.  Such is not the case today.

Also, there are umpteen religions on the planet with thousands of sects and denominations. Whose code of morality does one use?  Whose deity/spirit force does one turn to for guidance?

Religion and a belief in the supernatural hardly provide a single, unvarying source of morality. Religions change as cultures change.  Religions are born, evolve, and die.  Nothing in this world is static–not even people’s understanding of what they think their god(s) deem to be moral behavior.  People’s belief that only their religion is true might provide the illusion of statuc solidity but that’s hardly the way such social institutions work.

They persecuted religion and had people pray to the state and Stalin instead. Very literally. Same with Maosim in China and in an even more extreme form Juche in North Korea where the leaders are literally gods. They’re nothing but secular ersatz religions, complete with their own gods, temples and holy books.

I’m sorry, but i find the notion that we miss something because we do not believe in the nonexistent plain and simply ridiculous. Religion is widely known to block other perspectives, people were burnt alive for saying that Earth revolved around the sun, religious dogma is by definition immovable and unchangeable. That’s why so many creationnists think science is weak, because scientific theories can be adapted in the light of new evidence.

What people were burnt alive for saying the earth revolved around the sun?  Names?
I’m not sure I get the gist of the rest of your post, which seems to say I’m wrong about the idea that folks can miss things when they see the world one way or another, since you then go on to point out how religion does just that.  You’re suggesting only religion, and nothing else?   

All that proves is that if you eliminate religion, people will fill it with something else.  The stories of incense and prayers being lifted up to Stalin or Mao are shaky at best, and smack of historical urban myth.  In each case you mention, it’s the result of the atheist’s ‘all religion is evil and all evil is religion’ mantra.  That’s not to say they didn’t *act* like gods.  But the idea that various individuals were religious simply because the demand absolute fealty is stretching the definition of the word religious.  I’m inclined to agree with Glasoofruix on this one. This comes not from a clear and definite definition of religion that the non-religious leadership of these regimes supposedly embraced, but rather as a sort of backwards reasoning that says if all evil is religious, then these regimes must have been religious somehow. 

That’s bull and you know it. The majority of people in this country are theists, and the majority of theists are Christians. I went to public school, and even then I was still surrounded by Christians. I think you’re confusing “secular” with “atheist.” There’s a difference. 

Also, a child being evangelized to in school is a captive audience–they have to be at school. You are not a captive audience when you choose to visit this blog. The same for your children.

 I can see how you would perceive “new atheism” to be evangelistic, but you’ve yet to show an example of it being abusive. All you’ve said is that there is the potential for abuse of power, I agree with this to the extent that there is potential for abuse within any movement.

Over the weekend I had much the same response (although I’m an adult) when my mother, sister, and brother-in-law started talking to me about my atheism. When I was a Christian I was so sure of myself and such a soldier for God. My atheism, however, is completely due to being led away by other people.